|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
i've got a question....why is it that many of us are happily trading on
wfw3.11, win95, and win98 with ts 4 or 2000 WITHOUT any crashes? i was
like many here on this list, doubtful. but surprise, surprise, ts 2000
sp2 and win98 1st ed loaded and ran just fine while i had it....on a p2
333 and 96 meg ram. true, i sent it back, but not because of crashes,
but because it was too sloooow for me.
meanwhile, i'm back to ts4 and win98/win95/wfw3.11 and still running
crash-free.
but i'm puzzled....why is there such a dichotomy of problems associated
with win98 and ts whatever, such that some load and run it effortlessly
while others struggle with the twin demons from sw hell? take gary,
he's running a fresh nt install on a new computer and has had nothing
but problems. so, what's the deal? i think mark b. mentioned a while
back that ts4 was less stable on nt than win95 on his puters.
btw, i'm firmly in the scan, defrag, and reboot weekly camp, because i
believe with the massive data files ts whatever generates, it's easier
for access errors to pop up. so defragging DOES improve stability and
roots out problems before they occur. a well designed data server
should not have those problems. just a guess
TJ
not getting into the os swamp again until win2000 sp3 or
linux/traderware ;))
"Dale Andren" <andren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >There has been much discussion of defragging here lately, that I
> think
> >misses the point. Defragging may help speed and performance, but
> does
> >nothing to improve stability. NT is adding the stability. I dare
> anyone of
> >you defrag proponents to go back to Win98 and defrag all you want.
> You will
> >still crash, just like before with ts2000. Windows NT is allowing
> TS2000 to
> >run without crashes, not whatever defrag program you choose. I think
> you are
> >misleading the list by claiming that these defrag programs are
> adding
> >stability. Speed maybe stability no. I have been using NT since
> before Omega
> >SP2, and I would be way more concerned about the stability of ts2000
> than I
> >would about performance tweaks. Ts2000 for all practical purposes is
> >unsuitable for trading on any other Win OS than NT, period.
> >
> >IMHO,
> >Dale
|